ekted&#039;s brain dump

United States

Maine

NateStraight wrote:

The major one you're missing is "Wow, your company's doing so much better than mine... I can't take it over but at least I can buy up some stock so I can reap some of the benefit" and then the subsequent decision by the other player "Do I keep this company and be happy with my smaller marginal gain against you or do I somehow rig up a way to rid it of all of its trains, waste all of its track lays, sell all my stock, and dump the empty shell on you so you're forced to pick up the slack?"

But if you keep the company, no matter how good/poorly it does, you make out better than minority shareholders, right?

NateStraight wrote:

"Multi-player solitaire" might be the craziest thing I've ever heard levied against 18xx!

Usually you're cursing every other move every other player makes because it screws you up so bad.

I never saw this once, except with regards to the train stuff, which I find to be a really silly part of the design.

Posted Fri Aug 12, 2011 7:49 pm
- Choose your Dice
  - d4
  - d6
  - d8
  - d10
  - d12
  - d20
  - d100
  - Help
  - Roll
  - Comment (Optional)
- Reply
- Quote

Eric Brosius

(Eric Brosius)

United States
Needham Heights
Massachusetts

Here's a brief discussion of some of the things one thinks about in one 18XX game:

http://www.boardgamegeek.com/thread/599347

Posted Fri Aug 12, 2011 7:49 pm
- Choose your Dice
  - d4
  - d6
  - d8
  - d10
  - d12
  - d20
  - d100
  - Help
  - Roll
  - Comment (Optional)
- Reply
- Quote

Eric Flood

United States
Sunnyvale
California

First - 18AL is *boring*. I have lost more potential players than found with it. The biggest problem I have with the game is that it allows (but at least doesn't encourage) players to play in boring patterns, with few threats.

Quote:

So not only does the system feel like multi-player solitaire, but every decision feels uninteresting.

Not even 18AL is deserving of this. I disagree with this statement to the very essence of my being - Dominion is a multiplayer solitaire game. 18xx is *not*.

Quote:

Buy/sell shares: If the owner has 60%, then no one can take over the company.

But if I have 40%, then I'm making only marginally less than that player; plus, unless that player decides to dump the company on me (a dance I can manage in my favor via priority shuffling), they assume all liabilities of the forced train purchase (normally, this is a *much* bigger threat than in 18AL).

Quote:

Selling shares drives the stock price down, but then you get less/no dividends. Buying shares only nets you money if the owner pays dividends, but he always gets more than you.

If you are selling shares, ensure there are other shares to buy, so that you earn other dividends. Look at the companies and try to figure out if that company you're putting your hard-earned money into will pay or withhold (i.e. if it needs new trains or not), both in the short-term and long-term (i.e. yeah, it's not paying *now*, but it'll pay out buckets very soon, and I want to be prepared...).

Quote:

Blocking track: At one build per operating round, there are no big blocks like in the Steam line of games. This option seems almost non-existent.

Tragic track exists and it is incredibly painful when done right. Just because you didn't see it in one game doesn't mean it doesn't exist.

Quote:

Blocking stations: This seems pretty minor as well, but a little more effective than blocking track.

Station management is one of the most crucial elements of the game - they block rather severely in so many cases. Combine some tragic track and a good station-blocking token, and you will hear many groans.

Quote:

Buying trains: Keeping a company from getting the trains it wants, or causing rust seem like an over-the-top points of chaos.

Roughly manageable chaos; timing your train purchases properly, and forcing other companies to rust their shiny new trains before they get a chance to run properly is the name of the game.

Quote:

I understand that the game is not as I have described it. I am using the Socratic method, as always. Enlighten me.

I understand the game not as you have played it.

Imagine that someone taught you Go on a 4x4, capturing game only (first capture wins), and you assumed that that was all Go is, and claimed there was no interesting game. Meanwhile, beyond the simple 4x4 capturing game, there is a beautiful 19x19 full game that exists - but it is not the 4x4 game you have played.

Posted Fri Aug 12, 2011 7:50 pm
- Choose your Dice
  - d4
  - d6
  - d8
  - d10
  - d12
  - d20
  - d100
  - Help
  - Roll
  - Comment (Optional)
- Reply
- Quote

(NateStraight)

Lacombe
Louisiana

It was a dark and stormy night.

ekted wrote:

NateStraight wrote:

The major one you're missing is "Wow, your company's doing so much better than mine... I can't take it over but at least I can buy up some stock so I can reap some of the benefit" and then the subsequent decision by the other player "Do I keep this company and be happy with my smaller marginal gain against you or do I somehow rig up a way to rid it of all of its trains, waste all of its track lays, sell all my stock, and dump the empty shell on you so you're forced to pick up the slack?"

But if you keep the company, no matter how good/poorly it does, you make out better than minority shareholders, right?

Sure, but potentially not better than you'd make out against them if you cause them to have to waste a ton of money buying a train they didn't want while you're busy picking up a new company that can do even better.

[This also may not function in a game as small as 18AL with only 6 companies; usually there are some companies that remain non-operational for the better part of the game and are available to be started in the middle of the game to provide new strategic directions for players.]

Quote:

NateStraight wrote:

"Multi-player solitaire" might be the craziest thing I've ever heard levied against 18xx!

Usually you're cursing every other move every other player makes because it screws you up so bad.

I never saw this once, except with regards to the train stuff, which I find to be a really silly part of the design.

The trains are basically the entire point of the 18xx games.

If you don't like them, there's a good chance you just don't like the system.

Edited Fri Aug 12, 2011 7:51 pm
Posted Fri Aug 12, 2011 7:51 pm
- Choose your Dice
  - d4
  - d6
  - d8
  - d10
  - d12
  - d20
  - d100
  - Help
  - Roll
  - Comment (Optional)
- Reply
- Quote

Jim Cote

United States

Maine

blueatheart wrote:

Roughly manageable chaos; timing your train purchases properly, and forcing other companies to rust their shiny new trains before they get a chance to run properly is the name of the game.

I don't find that interesting.

Posted Fri Aug 12, 2011 7:54 pm
- Choose your Dice
  - d4
  - d6
  - d8
  - d10
  - d12
  - d20
  - d100
  - Help
  - Roll
  - Comment (Optional)
- Reply
- Quote

Bob Archer

United States
Tampa
Florida

Quote:

You control two companies. I control one. What can I possibly do to have any effect on my income relative to yours? We can both see each company's cash/trains, each player's cash, and the best places to build track and stations. What are the non-auto-pilot decisions, and why are they interesting?

Seriously, once you answer the above question you will get the essence.

This is one of the most strategic games I play. It is also very tactical too.

Damn right you can screw with someone else. You can dump companies on them, make their trains rust, take that tile they needed, block their high revenue run with a station, trash their stock price, etc.

Keep in mind too, you played an "intro" 18xx which has pretty tame rules and stock market. 18AL is really about learning the system.

Oh and Acquire and Imperial are also favorites of mine.

But, you can always stick to Munchkin if you want more interaction, randomness and lack of strategy.

BOb

Edited Fri Aug 12, 2011 7:55 pm
Posted Fri Aug 12, 2011 7:54 pm
- Choose your Dice
  - d4
  - d6
  - d8
  - d10
  - d12
  - d20
  - d100
  - Help
  - Roll
  - Comment (Optional)
- Reply
- Quote

Jim Cote

United States

Maine

pilotbob wrote:

Keep in mind too, you played an "intro" 18xx which has pretty tame rules and stock market. 18AL is really about learning the system.

But I think in this context, "tame" means less chaos. More chaos can only make the game worse for me. It's like Puerto Rico or Agricola with 5p. Every player action in the game is all-or-nothing with regards to some future action or resource. No predictability or control. Zero fun.

Posted Fri Aug 12, 2011 8:00 pm
- Choose your Dice
  - d4
  - d6
  - d8
  - d10
  - d12
  - d20
  - d100
  - Help
  - Roll
  - Comment (Optional)
- Reply
- Quote

J C Lawrence

United States
Campbell
California

There are three core concepts in the 18xx:

1) Creative Destruction
2) Fractional incentive
3) Contingent liability

You'll need to thoroughly understand at least two of them to do more than vaguely wander about when playing the 18xx.

Edited Fri Aug 12, 2011 9:41 pm
Posted Fri Aug 12, 2011 8:02 pm
- Choose your Dice
  - d4
  - d6
  - d8
  - d10
  - d12
  - d20
  - d100
  - Help
  - Roll
  - Comment (Optional)
- Reply
- Quote

Eric Flood

United States
Sunnyvale
California

ekted wrote:

pilotbob wrote:

Keep in mind too, you played an "intro" 18xx which has pretty tame rules and stock market. 18AL is really about learning the system.

But I think in this context, "tame" means less chaos. More chaos can only make the game worse for me. It's like Puerto Rico or Agricola with 5p. Every player action in the game is all-or-nothing with regards to some future action or resource. No predictability or control. Zero fun.

No, it doesn't mean more chaos. Often, it actually means more control, if only you can manage the reins (insert metaphor of automatic versus manual here).

ekted wrote:

blueatheart wrote:

Roughly manageable chaos; timing your train purchases properly, and forcing other companies to rust their shiny new trains before they get a chance to run properly is the name of the game.

I don't find that interesting.

It's not very different than managing your timing/bidding of the "Locomotion" ability in AoS.

Posted Fri Aug 12, 2011 8:09 pm
- Choose your Dice
  - d4
  - d6
  - d8
  - d10
  - d12
  - d20
  - d100
  - Help
  - Roll
  - Comment (Optional)
- Reply
- Quote

Jim Cote

United States

Maine

blueatheart wrote:

No, it doesn't mean more chaos. Often, it actually means more control, if only you can manage the reins (insert metaphor of automatic versus manual here).

I'm talking about mathematical chaos. I can buy a train or not. If I buy a train, it removes other trains from the game and allows new tiles to enter play. The decision may be a very close one. How can other players make plans with that kind of decision in your hands? The common answer is "plan for both". I find that uninteresting in the context of chaos and extremely poor granularity.

Posted Fri Aug 12, 2011 8:16 pm
- Choose your Dice
  - d4
  - d6
  - d8
  - d10
  - d12
  - d20
  - d100
  - Help
  - Roll
  - Comment (Optional)
- Reply
- Quote

Jim Cote

United States

Maine

blueatheart wrote:

It's not very different than managing your timing/bidding of the "Locomotion" ability in AoS.

I don't like the bidding system in AoS at all.

Posted Fri Aug 12, 2011 8:17 pm
- Choose your Dice
  - d4
  - d6
  - d8
  - d10
  - d12
  - d20
  - d100
  - Help
  - Roll
  - Comment (Optional)
- Reply
- Quote

Eric Flood

United States
Sunnyvale
California

ekted wrote:

blueatheart wrote:

No, it doesn't mean more chaos. Often, it actually means more control, if only you can manage the reins (insert metaphor of automatic versus manual here).

I'm talking about mathematical chaos. I can buy a train or not. If I buy a train, it removes other trains from the game and allows new tiles to enter play. The decision may be a very close one. How can other players make plans with that kind of decision in your hands? The common answer is "plan for both". I find that uninteresting in the context of chaos and extremely poor granularity.

The key point here is attempting to ensure that it's not a "key decision" by runtime. In Stock Rounds, you're compiling incentive patterns, and the Operating Rounds should have very little perturbations upon the gamestate you imagine playing out in your head (aside from some head-bashing mistakes). Anticipating tragic-track/tokening that can occur by giving the next player access to green track; counting trains and figuring out when that 4-train will be bought, and how you need to position your company to adapt; it's all very predictable, if only you take the time to read.

New players could also (incorrectly) claim that there is so much chaos in one stone being placed, or that groups live or die entirely by chaos, and it is simply unmanageable. How can the other player make plans with that kind of board-altering decision in your hands?

Edit: It also appears that you are predisposed to a mindset, and much like arguing about political preferences, it is likely to be useless beyond a certain threshold. I believe we've mostly reached that threshhold here.

Edited Fri Aug 12, 2011 8:32 pm
Posted Fri Aug 12, 2011 8:31 pm
- Choose your Dice
  - d4
  - d6
  - d8
  - d10
  - d12
  - d20
  - d100
  - Help
  - Roll
  - Comment (Optional)
- Reply
- Quote

Chester Ogborn

United States
Albuquerque
New Mexico

I'm of the opinion that if you really want your questions answered, Jim, you should play a full 18xx game (rather than a small learning module like 18AL). 1830 is a good option for this. If you play that game and don't find the decisions interesting, and start to see the wide range of both strategy and tactics, then I'd conclude 18xx is not your thing.

For someone who has played more than a just a couple of 18xx games, I think your initial comments sound pretty off (as evidenced by the discussion). I just don't see how this thread is going to provide what you're asking as well as firsthand experience will.

Posted Fri Aug 12, 2011 8:39 pm
- Choose your Dice
  - d4
  - d6
  - d8
  - d10
  - d12
  - d20
  - d100
  - Help
  - Roll
  - Comment (Optional)
- Reply
- Quote

Phil

United States
Falmouth
Maine

Skyrim = Amazing!!!

O.o

blueatheart wrote:

First - 18AL is *boring*. I have lost more potential players than found with it. The biggest problem I have with the game is that it allows (but at least doesn't encourage) players to play in boring patterns, with few threats.

I was one of the other players in Ekted's game of 18AL. I seem to have taken the opposite train of thought that he has. To me I see 18AL as the very tiny tip of the iceberg of a whole new world of gaming. If 18AL is boring than I cannot wait to see what meatier 18xx games have to offer. I think the major problem will be getting them to the table with the right crowd of gamers.

Posted Fri Aug 12, 2011 8:45 pm
- Choose your Dice
  - d4
  - d6
  - d8
  - d10
  - d12
  - d20
  - d100
  - Help
  - Roll
  - Comment (Optional)
- Reply
- Quote

Claudio Campuzano

(claudio212)

United States
Portland
Oregon

ekted wrote:

blueatheart wrote:

No, it doesn't mean more chaos. Often, it actually means more control, if only you can manage the reins (insert metaphor of automatic versus manual here).

I'm talking about mathematical chaos. I can buy a train or not. If I buy a train, it removes other trains from the game and allows new tiles to enter play. The decision may be a very close one. How can other players make plans with that kind of decision in your hands? The common answer is "plan for both". I find that uninteresting in the context of chaos and extremely poor granularity.

I find it very difficult to reconcile your criticism on the one hand that the game is multi-player solitaire and on the other that there is too much chaos wrought by player actions. What you describe is not chaos, it is the very interaction that you say is lacking.

Understanding the game state and your tools to manipulate it to your advantage is everything in 18xx, from what I can tell. (Background: I consider myself a Train Gamer As Yet Not Totally Enthusiastic About 18XX). This understanding comes with time, is fragile across player groups, and does not ensure winning.

That last bit, I believe, is the nature of truly interactive multiplayer games. The 'best' player may not win, but that is not the point; the point is for players to bring their best thinking to a game and, in doing so, create a fulfilling, challenging, and beautiful experience for everyone. True MPS games seem to cater to certain players need to have the best man win. The only way to ensure that is to mitigate the negative impact of lesser player's mistakes by eliminating interaction.

I have wandered. But my point is: I've seem MPS, and 18XX is not MPS.

Posted Fri Aug 12, 2011 8:51 pm
- Choose your Dice
  - d4
  - d6
  - d8
  - d10
  - d12
  - d20
  - d100
  - Help
  - Roll
  - Comment (Optional)
- Reply
- Quote

Bob Archer

United States
Tampa
Florida

ekted wrote:

The decision may be a very close one. How can other players make plans with that kind of decision in your hands? The common answer is "plan for both". I find that uninteresting in the context of chaos and extremely poor granularity.

There is no randomness in 18xx except what the other players do. The more of the game YOU control, stock market, train rush, track building, the better you do. You shouldn't be re-acting to what happens you should be controlling what happens. Of course, all the other players are trying to do this too.

It is just like chess... there is a large amount of possible moves your opponent can make... while you are reacting to his moves you also have a pretty good idea of what move or two he will make and plan to guard against that or plan for it.

On the one hand you say there is no interaction and on the other hand you say that what some other player does affects you... erm, you can't have it both ways.

BOb

Edited Fri Aug 12, 2011 8:54 pm
Posted Fri Aug 12, 2011 8:53 pm
- Choose your Dice
  - d4
  - d6
  - d8
  - d10
  - d12
  - d20
  - d100
  - Help
  - Roll
  - Comment (Optional)
- Reply
- Quote

Eric Flood

United States
Sunnyvale
California

Quarashi wrote:

blueatheart wrote:

First - 18AL is *boring*. I have lost more potential players than found with it. The biggest problem I have with the game is that it allows (but at least doesn't encourage) players to play in boring patterns, with few threats.

I was one of the other players in Ekted's game of 18AL. I seem to have taken the opposite train of thought that he has. To me I see 18AL as the very tiny tip of the iceberg of a whole new world of gaming. If 18AL is boring than I cannot wait to see what meatier 18xx games have to offer. I think the major problem will be getting them to the table with the right crowd of gamers.

The main problem is that most people don't enjoy thinking very much, and wrap up too much of their self-worth in winning. If it is too difficult to play, too difficult to win, people will often look the other way. Most people love winning by a masked roll of the die.

Plus, when people hear the words 4 hours of dedicated thinking, their eyes glaze over, they remember homework and study sessions. But I'll miss American Idol, Glee, the Red Sox game, and the new mostly mindless hotness! My entire social structure is established by my awareness of these (passive|passive|passive|semi-active) pop culture icons! If I don't (watch the show|watch the show|watch the game|play the game), the (singer|student|team|me) I want to win might not!

These are the major barriers to finding interested parties, in my experience.

Edited Fri Aug 12, 2011 8:55 pm
Posted Fri Aug 12, 2011 8:54 pm
- Choose your Dice
  - d4
  - d6
  - d8
  - d10
  - d12
  - d20
  - d100
  - Help
  - Roll
  - Comment (Optional)
- Reply
- Quote

Chester Ogborn

United States
Albuquerque
New Mexico

Since I can DVR the hockey game, I have a lot more interest in 18xx.

Posted Fri Aug 12, 2011 9:02 pm
- Choose your Dice
  - d4
  - d6
  - d8
  - d10
  - d12
  - d20
  - d100
  - Help
  - Roll
  - Comment (Optional)
- Reply
- Quote

Jim Cote

United States

Maine

pilotbob wrote:

There is no randomness in 18xx except what the other players do.

Of course. I think you are taking my use of "chaos" to be something like Arkham Horror, which it is not.

pilotbob wrote:

On the one hand you say there is no interaction and on the other hand you say that what some other player does affects you... erm, you can't have it both ways.

Sure you can. We both play solitaire. The player who finishes last gets to decide if the player who finishes last wins or loses. That's an extreme simplification of what my game felt like.

Posted Fri Aug 12, 2011 9:12 pm
- Choose your Dice
  - d4
  - d6
  - d8
  - d10
  - d12
  - d20
  - d100
  - Help
  - Roll
  - Comment (Optional)
- Reply
- Quote

Jim Cote

United States

Maine

cornjob wrote:

I think your initial comments sound pretty off...

Socratic method: A form of inquiry and debate between individuals with opposing viewpoints based on asking and answering questions to stimulate critical thinking and to illuminate ideas. [I do this automatically everywhere in my life. Some find it confrontational. They are irrelevant.*]

I recognized (up front) that I was making wild claims. I was hoping the discussion would forge new interest in exploring the system. So far, nothing that anyone has said has been an "aha moment", although I do acknowledge that dumping a company on the secondary shareholder was something that I (we) didn't see. A few more things like that, and maybe I'll come around.

* The Socratic method can be used recursively.

Posted Fri Aug 12, 2011 9:21 pm
- Choose your Dice
  - d4
  - d6
  - d8
  - d10
  - d12
  - d20
  - d100
  - Help
  - Roll
  - Comment (Optional)
- Reply
- Quote

Russ Williams

(russ)

Poland
Wrocław
Dolny Śląsk

I haven't played 18AL but I've played 1830, 1856, 1870, and 2038. I've read various reviews that make me think 18AL is too watered down and doesn't give a full taste of 18xx.

Full 18xx is definitely not multi-player solitaire.

Track blocking tactics are real and important in the 18xx I've played (I can't speak for 18AL).

Stock market manipulation is very significant and important in 1830 and others (I can't speak for 18AL).

But if it doesn't grab you, it doesn't grab you.

Posted Fri Aug 12, 2011 9:40 pm
- Choose your Dice
  - d4
  - d6
  - d8
  - d10
  - d12
  - d20
  - d100
  - Help
  - Roll
  - Comment (Optional)
- Reply
- Quote

J C Lawrence

United States
Campbell
California

It is hard to explain the concept of a forest to someone who has not seen a tree. Each of the points that you label predictable and uninteresting is (in a well designed game, of which there are many, but a category in which I wouldn't put 18AL) a source of significant decisions as well as player strongly positional differentiation. However we can't show you the forest when you've not yet seen a tree.

Edited Fri Aug 12, 2011 9:45 pm
Posted Fri Aug 12, 2011 9:41 pm
- Choose your Dice
  - d4
  - d6
  - d8
  - d10
  - d12
  - d20
  - d100
  - Help
  - Roll
  - Comment (Optional)
- Reply
- Quote

Chester Ogborn

United States
Albuquerque
New Mexico

ekted wrote:

cornjob wrote:

I think your initial comments sound pretty off...

Socratic method: A form of inquiry and debate between individuals with opposing viewpoints based on asking and answering questions to stimulate critical thinking and to illuminate ideas. [I do this automatically everywhere in my life. Some find it confrontational. They are irrelevant.*]

I recognized (up front) that I was making wild claims. I was hoping the discussion would forge new interest in exploring the system. So far, nothing that anyone has said has been an "aha moment", although I do acknowledge that dumping a company on the secondary shareholder was something that I (we) didn't see. A few more things like that, and maybe I'll come around.

* The Socratic method can be used recursively.

I took note of your comment about the Socratic method. My point was a recommendation to pursue your own firsthand experience. It seems pretty unanimous among the 18xx players who have responded that 18AL is a shadow of the full game experience. Why are we trying to describe an elephant to a blind man, when he can just take off the blast-shield and see for himself?

Posted Fri Aug 12, 2011 9:59 pm
- Choose your Dice
  - d4
  - d6
  - d8
  - d10
  - d12
  - d20
  - d100
  - Help
  - Roll
  - Comment (Optional)
- Reply
- Quote

Breno K.

Brazil
Brasília
Distrito Federal

ekted wrote:

blueatheart wrote:

No, it doesn't mean more chaos. Often, it actually means more control, if only you can manage the reins (insert metaphor of automatic versus manual here).

I'm talking about mathematical chaos. I can buy a train or not. If I buy a train, it removes other trains from the game and allows new tiles to enter play. The decision may be a very close one. How can other players make plans with that kind of decision in your hands? The common answer is "plan for both". I find that uninteresting in the context of chaos and extremely poor granularity.

Plan for both = defeat. One does not win 18xx taking the middleground, ever. Either one thing or the other happens, and in both situations the player that put all his chips in one of the outcomes will win.

It's about predicting what the other players will do and adjust yourself accordingly, if you can. You can only predict by thinking up their incentives and seeing what they "must" do. It takes a table of rational players for 18xx to be played strategically. You will sometimes lose because some other player made a clearly wrong choice. That's something that you must be able to live with.

Edited Fri Aug 12, 2011 11:41 pm
Posted Fri Aug 12, 2011 11:35 pm
- Choose your Dice
  - d4
  - d6
  - d8
  - d10
  - d12
  - d20
  - d100
  - Help
  - Roll
  - Comment (Optional)
- Reply
- Quote

Eric Flood

United States
Sunnyvale
California

BrenoK wrote:

Plan for both = defeat. One does not win 18xx taking the middleground, ever. Either one thing or the other happens, and in both situations the player that put all his chips

Aside: There appear to be a handful of titles which have situtations where it might make sense at certain points in the game to "play for both," but it seems to be rare and I could well be wrong.

Quote:

It takes a table of rational players for 18xx to be played strategically.

Sometimes, rational isn't enough...

Posted Fri Aug 12, 2011 11:42 pm
- Choose your Dice
  - d4
  - d6
  - d8
  - d10
  - d12
  - d20
  - d100
  - Help
  - Roll
  - Comment (Optional)
- Reply
- Quote

Breno K.

Brazil
Brasília
Distrito Federal

ekted wrote:

cornjob wrote:

I think your initial comments sound pretty off...

Socratic method: A form of inquiry and debate between individuals with opposing viewpoints based on asking and answering questions to stimulate critical thinking and to illuminate ideas. [I do this automatically everywhere in my life. Some find it confrontational. They are irrelevant.*]

I recognized (up front) that I was making wild claims. I was hoping the discussion would forge new interest in exploring the system. So far, nothing that anyone has said has been an "aha moment", although I do acknowledge that dumping a company on the secondary shareholder was something that I (we) didn't see. A few more things like that, and maybe I'll come around.

So you hadn't even seen the very first thing that 18xx has to offer. This is like posting on a topic about puerto rico saying that you didn't realize the other players doing the action you chose should be taken into consideration in your decisions.

You might as well quit while you are so behind that it shows that no effort was made to understand the game beyond an enactment of the rulebook (though 18AL really is a super-tame version of 18xx)

It takes real effort to understand and thus truly enjoy 18xx. If you're willing to write it off so quickly, then odds are you probably should, as you're probably a more sociable gamer without it. God knows how most games seem like crap to me nowadays, after playing 18xx extensively. It has alienated me from a lot of of my gaming group's activity.

Edited Fri Aug 12, 2011 11:47 pm
Posted Fri Aug 12, 2011 11:45 pm
- Choose your Dice
  - d4
  - d6
  - d8
  - d10
  - d12
  - d20
  - d100
  - Help
  - Roll
  - Comment (Optional)
- Reply
- Quote

Steven Metzger

(metzgerism)

United States
Pullman
Washington

I know ekted to be one of the smarter, more open-minded and eloquent members of the BGG community. Here's my take on 18xx:

I started seriously gaming (game nights, BGG account) at 23. I tried 1889 right after turning 24 and have a constant line of communication with clearclaw.

I hated it.

But because of the attitude of 18xx'ers, and the not-what-you'd-expect conversations I've had with JC, I promised myself I'd play 18xx when I turn 30 (and hopefully move back here, to California). I just turned 26 and moved away a year ago.

That gives me six years (two since I made my pledge) to explore what the world of eurogames has to offer before diving headfirst into this class of games, and hopefully evolve into the type of gamer that can appreciate and excel at the 18xx series.

What isn't moving in the right direction is my game-length preference: Hansa Teutonica is the longest game I generally am willing to play right now, and at about 120 minutes that means I'm not ready yet.

Edited Sat Aug 13, 2011 12:30 am
Posted Sat Aug 13, 2011 12:27 am
- Choose your Dice
  - d4
  - d6
  - d8
  - d10
  - d12
  - d20
  - d100
  - Help
  - Roll
  - Comment (Optional)
- Reply
- Quote

Paul Clarke

(paulclarke339)

United Kingdom
Southampton
Hampshire

What is it that makes 18AL super-tame?

I've already got:
* The privates can only be sold for up to 1.5x
* 4 Trains have delayed obsolescence

Posted Sat Aug 13, 2011 12:29 am
- Choose your Dice
  - d4
  - d6
  - d8
  - d10
  - d12
  - d20
  - d100
  - Help
  - Roll
  - Comment (Optional)
- Reply
- Quote

J C Lawrence

United States
Campbell
California

- The map is flat
- Company positions are poorly differentiated
- Capital challenges aren't
- The train rush isn't
- The capital rush isn't
- Train revenues are mostly a direct function of their length
- Player scores are heavily dominated by cash (ie dividends) instead of by stock portfolio/appreciation

Edited Sat Aug 13, 2011 1:07 am
Posted Sat Aug 13, 2011 12:55 am
- Choose your Dice
  - d4
  - d6
  - d8
  - d10
  - d12
  - d20
  - d100
  - Help
  - Roll
  - Comment (Optional)
- Reply
- Quote

Jim Cote

United States

Maine

BrenoK wrote:

So you hadn't even seen the very first thing that 18xx has to offer. This is like posting on a topic about puerto rico saying that you didn't realize the other players doing the action you chose should be taken into consideration in your decisions.

You might as well quit while you are so behind that it shows that no effort was made to understand the game beyond an enactment of the rulebook (though 18AL really is a super-tame version of 18xx)

I played the game once, and couldn't see why I should play again. Should I play 10 more times potentially not enjoying myself, or should I ask people who do enjoy it what they see in it?

BrenoK wrote:

It takes real effort to understand and thus truly enjoy 18xx. If you're willing to write it off so quickly, then odds are you probably should, as you're probably a more sociable gamer without it. God knows how most games seem like crap to me nowadays, after playing 18xx extensively. It has alienated me from a lot of of my gaming group's activity.

Obviously not true. You should know me better than that.

Edited Sat Aug 13, 2011 4:01 am
Posted Sat Aug 13, 2011 3:58 am
- Choose your Dice
  - d4
  - d6
  - d8
  - d10
  - d12
  - d20
  - d100
  - Help
  - Roll
  - Comment (Optional)
- Reply
- Quote

Eugene
Oregon

ekted wrote:

I played the game once, and couldn't see why I should play again. Should I play 10 more times potentially not enjoying myself, or should I ask people who do enjoy it what they see in it?

I've played 18xx about a dozen times, and though I've yet to feel the magic, I'm not throwing in the towel. Too many people whose taste in games I respect speak too highly of it.

Strangely, you neglected to mention what is my chief misgiving with 18xx: the tedious, procedural quality of the play, especially in the endgame.

Posted Sat Aug 13, 2011 4:20 am
- Choose your Dice
  - d4
  - d6
  - d8
  - d10
  - d12
  - d20
  - d100
  - Help
  - Roll
  - Comment (Optional)
- Reply
- Quote

Jim Cote

United States

Maine

garygarison wrote:

I've played 18xx about a dozen times, and though I've yet to feel the magic, I'm not throwing in the towel. Too many people whose taste in games I respect speak too highly of it.

That is why I am making any effort at all, rather than walking away.

garygarison wrote:

Strangely, you neglected to mention what is my chief misgiving with 18xx: the tedious, procedural quality of the play, especially in the endgame.

I don't mind procedural: Through the Ages, Die Macher, ASL, SFB. I've seen too many people playing 18xx--each with a laptop--to be surprised by that aspect of its nature.

Posted Sat Aug 13, 2011 4:40 am
- Choose your Dice
  - d4
  - d6
  - d8
  - d10
  - d12
  - d20
  - d100
  - Help
  - Roll
  - Comment (Optional)
- Reply
- Quote

Breno K.

Brazil
Brasília
Distrito Federal

18xx is basically the managing of volatile assets: the more trains you buy, the more money you can make. However, the more trains you buy, the less durable your assets are made, as each train bought speeds the demise of the previous trains. The more you move ahead, the closer you get to the edge of the pit... one hopes you're moving fast enough to make the jump, or have someone else's body to cushion your fall.

---

18xx is about having to make a call, and waiting to see if it is correct, or, even better, trying to make it so that it is correct. You have to predict what is going to happen. It is a game of timing and butterfly effects: you have to be at a certain spot at the exact moment to have your plans work, otherwise you might be forced to buy a train for 1100 instead of 630. And, because of the butterfly, what made you that smidge late or early might have happened an hour or so ago... if only you had paid enough attention...

---

18xx is about being shown that you are wrong. You learn how to play one version, you play it a few times, start to get the hang of it, then you move to another version and find all the paths you've drawn inside your head are worse than useless, since they actively drive you the wrong way.

---

18xx is like a musical instrument: give it to beginners, and you won't get great music out of it.

Posted Sun Aug 14, 2011 1:12 am
- Choose your Dice
  - d4
  - d6
  - d8
  - d10
  - d12
  - d20
  - d100
  - Help
  - Roll
  - Comment (Optional)
- Reply
- Quote

Richard Young

(Bubslug)

Canada
Victoria
BC

Old Ways Are Best!

Check Six!

In addition to what others have said: 18XX are "perfect information" games, no random elements (generally), and full of dynamics that must be experienced to fully appreciate (simply reading the rules will give no no idea how to play - being taught the rules will give you no idea how to play - playing once will give you no idea how to play); since experience is key, the game must be played by players of roughly equivalent experience for reasonable enjoyment (like Puerto Rico times ten); and, gamers speak of the brutality of Age of Steam - 18XX games increase brutality to the level of an art form (at least 1830 does).

So, not games for everyone to be sure. You are calculating and re-calculating continually. Every decision you make in the game has to have a well deliberated point to it. Long range strategies are important but turn-to-turn tactics must also be be learned and mastered. Not everyone likes Chess either...

Posted Mon Aug 15, 2011 6:14 am
- Choose your Dice
  - d4
  - d6
  - d8
  - d10
  - d12
  - d20
  - d100
  - Help
  - Roll
  - Comment (Optional)
- Reply
- Quote

J C Lawrence

United States
Campbell
California

There are four sub-games in 18xx:

1) The stock market
2) The trains
3) Network building (which includes aspects of tile tempo & management)
4) Portfolio management

Each decision in the four sub-games affects the other three sub-games. Good decision-making requires that all four-sub-games choreograph in support of each others versus the other players' positions and choreography. The stock market has a natural 2.5 round rhythm. The trains have a natural 1-1.5-2 round rhythm (and can be easily dialed up and down). Network rhythms are a function of the map's natural rhythm (usually ~3). Portfolio management also has a natural 2 round rhythm, but can drop alarmingly when pushed.

Edited Wed Aug 17, 2011 6:27 pm
Posted Mon Aug 15, 2011 9:09 am
- Choose your Dice
  - d4
  - d6
  - d8
  - d10
  - d12
  - d20
  - d100
  - Help
  - Roll
  - Comment (Optional)
- Reply
- Quote

Bob Archer

United States
Tampa
Florida

Bubslug wrote:

Long range strategies are important but turn-to-turn tactics must also be be learned and mastered. Not everyone likes Chess either...

Ha... tell me about it. I played 1853 Saturday and lost by $6. If I hadn't put in $10 of my own cash to buy the 4M train instead of the 3M train I would have won. I mis-estimated the amount of money in the bank, so if we had one more OR I would have won... but, $6 difference is VERY close when you consider our net worth's were @ $6000 each.

While I do enjoy the stock market aspects of 1830 branch, I also really like the fact that 1853 isn't about trashing stock or timing the market but about running good railroads and investing properly.

BOb

Posted Mon Aug 15, 2011 3:42 pm
- Choose your Dice
  - d4
  - d6
  - d8
  - d10
  - d12
  - d20
  - d100
  - Help
  - Roll
  - Comment (Optional)
- Reply
- Quote

J C Lawrence

United States
Campbell
California

ekted wrote:

Should I play 10 more times potentially not enjoying myself, or should I ask people who do enjoy it what they see in it?

You don't understand the game. That would be enough reason for me to continue playing.

Edited Thu Aug 18, 2011 2:57 am
Posted Mon Aug 15, 2011 7:29 pm
- Choose your Dice
  - d4
  - d6
  - d8
  - d10
  - d12
  - d20
  - d100
  - Help
  - Roll
  - Comment (Optional)
- Reply
- Quote

Breno K.

Brazil
Brasília
Distrito Federal

The true enjoyment of 18xx requires multiple frustrating totally-blind-newbie plays of it. It is entirely unlogical to ask for a person to go through multiple plays of a game that person does not enjoy.

It is like a leap of faith. If the little that you have seen does not intrigue you to dive further, then time is better spent elsewhere.

18AL in an all-newbie table is not a good representative of the thing, however.

Posted Thu Aug 18, 2011 2:44 am
- Choose your Dice
  - d4
  - d6
  - d8
  - d10
  - d12
  - d20
  - d100
  - Help
  - Roll
  - Comment (Optional)
- Reply
- Quote

Jim Cote

United States

Maine

We played another 3p game tonight with the same players. This time instead of a player going bankrupt, we played until the bank emptied. I recognized the opportunities to dump companies, but I think I did it too early, not understanding how many operating rounds were left. It was definitely an uptick session, and we'll probably move on to a different game. Maybe 1830. Hopefully 4 players.

Posted Thu Aug 18, 2011 5:54 am
- Choose your Dice
  - d4
  - d6
  - d8
  - d10
  - d12
  - d20
  - d100
  - Help
  - Roll
  - Comment (Optional)
- Reply
- Quote

Breno K.

Brazil
Brasília
Distrito Federal

Yeah, there's a window between realizing you can dump companies and understanding when it is a viable option.

Posted Thu Aug 18, 2011 12:31 pm
- Choose your Dice
  - d4
  - d6
  - d8
  - d10
  - d12
  - d20
  - d100
  - Help
  - Roll
  - Comment (Optional)
- Reply
- Quote

Claudio Campuzano

(claudio212)

United States
Portland
Oregon

brenok wrote:

The true enjoyment of 18xx requires multiple frustrating totally-blind-newbie plays of it. It is entirely unlogical to ask for a person to go through multiple plays of a game that person does not enjoy.

It is like a leap of faith. If the little that you have seen does not intrigue you to dive further, then time is better spent elsewhere.

...

ekted wrote:

We played another 3p game tonight with the same players. This time instead of a player going bankrupt, we played until the bank emptied. I recognized the opportunities to dump companies, but I think I did it too early, not understanding how many operating rounds were left. It was definitely an uptick session, and we'll probably move on to a different game. Maybe 1830. Hopefully 4 players.

Methinks someone is taking the leap of faith...

Despite my only moderate enthusiasm for 18XX after three plays, I also still keep feeling drawn to it. What is it about this game?

Posted Thu Aug 18, 2011 4:37 pm
- Choose your Dice
  - d4
  - d6
  - d8
  - d10
  - d12
  - d20
  - d100
  - Help
  - Roll
  - Comment (Optional)
- Reply
- Quote

Bob Archer

United States
Tampa
Florida

claudio212 wrote:

Despite my only moderate enthusiasm for 18XX after three plays, I also still keep feeling drawn to it. What is it about this game?

18xx is pure awesome in a box (some more awesome than others). The more you play it the more you realize what you don't know. I like both the 1829 branch and the 1830 branch. This is a 6-8 hour game where the time seems to fly by (assuming you aren't playing in a church with broken A/C in June in Tampa that is.

)

1830 and 1853 are my current favorites, but 2038 is a very close 3rd.

BOb

Posted Thu Aug 18, 2011 6:46 pm
- Choose your Dice
  - d4
  - d6
  - d8
  - d10
  - d12
  - d20
  - d100
  - Help
  - Roll
  - Comment (Optional)
- Reply
- Quote

Phil

United States
Falmouth
Maine

Skyrim = Amazing!!!

O.o

I think the pure essence of 18xx is fun! laugh

Posted Thu Aug 18, 2011 6:52 pm
- Choose your Dice
  - d4
  - d6
  - d8
  - d10
  - d12
  - d20
  - d100
  - Help
  - Roll
  - Comment (Optional)
- Reply
- Quote

Eugene
Oregon

claudio212 wrote:

Despite my only moderate enthusiasm for 18XX after three plays, I also still keep feeling drawn to it. What is it about this game?

Trains, route-building, shares, and the opportunity to be a dick. It pretty much covers all the bases.

Posted Thu Aug 18, 2011 7:10 pm
- Choose your Dice
  - d4
  - d6
  - d8
  - d10
  - d12
  - d20
  - d100
  - Help
  - Roll
  - Comment (Optional)
- Reply
- Quote

Ben

(chally)

United States
Washington
Dist of Columbia

I was the third player in Jim & Phil's game (and the victor, thank you very much). The second game was certainly much more interesting than the first, although the last few ORs of fully-optimized runs were a bit on the dull side. There were a number of new player mistakes (including both Phil and Jim starting second companies at only $60/share when they couldn't affiord to float them, and me being too personally invested in my first company to dump the shares to float a high-par second company on OR4). But we generally did well for ourselves and had fun.

18AL feels a little less interesting than my previous foray into 18xx, 1846. Nevertheless, it's not remotely a bad game, and I think the openness of the system allows players more flexibility to experiment with various strategies. It certainly makes me want to come back to it right away to try and improve upon what I've learned. Once we all get the dance down, there could maybe be a good game here. For now it's a respectable _5_.

Posted Thu Aug 18, 2011 10:09 pm
- Choose your Dice
  - d4
  - d6
  - d8
  - d10
  - d12
  - d20
  - d100
  - Help
  - Roll
  - Comment (Optional)
- Reply
- Quote

Eric Flood

United States
Sunnyvale
California

chally wrote:

There were a number of new player mistakes (including both Phil and Jim starting second companies at only $60/share when they couldn't affiord to float them

I was literally drinking coffee - and choked on it/spit it out when I read this. Thanks.

C'mon guys, you have simple maths abilities! If you don't have $360 ($402 is more often the "magic number"), you don't have a second company! Sell shares in your other companies if need be (potentially making offers for someone else to take a Presidency you might not want as much as the new company). One should *never* wind up in this position as a new player, although there are situations where reserving presidency is an excellent play (I'm not good enough to grok those intricacies fully, myself).

It is actually usually a better idea to start a second company much higher than $60 anyway.

Posted Thu Aug 18, 2011 10:40 pm
- Choose your Dice
  - d4
  - d6
  - d8
  - d10
  - d12
  - d20
  - d100
  - Help
  - Roll
  - Comment (Optional)
- Reply
- Quote

Ben

(chally)

United States
Washington
Dist of Columbia

blueatheart wrote:

C'mon guys, you have simple maths abilities!

I think it's precisely the "simple" math that's the challenge for new players at this stage. If I have 6 shares in Company A and I want to float Company B as well, I'm considering the following two options:

1. Sell shares in A to float B this OR.
2. Wait and float B next OR.

Assume option (1) requires the sale of at least 3 shares. That's $15/share in stock depreciation for the three I keep (i.e. -$45). I also lose the dividends from those three A shares for one OR (i.e. -$24). So option (1) costs me $69 and exposes me to the possibility of losing my company.

Option (2) costs an OR.

So the "simple" math says I'm losing money on option (1). The costs of option (2) involve not-so-simple math: It is not easy for new players to see whether, and under what circumstances, getting Company B floated one OR earlier is worth the $69 loss and potential change of presidency.

Among experienced players, I suspect that these options wouldn't even be contemplated unless the timing were right to make Option (2) the better choice (including things like what trains are available and what trains will rust when highly capitalized Company B hits the purchasing phase). But, as new players, our timing was shot all to hell anyway (e.g., our train rush stalled out for more rounds than any of us would care to admit and each company ended the game with just a single permanent).

This, if nothing else, is the primary redeeming feature of the game: we had fun in flailing about for 5 hours (and frequently cursing), and the next day we're all still pondering how to flail (and curse) a little less next time around.

Posted Thu Aug 18, 2011 11:04 pm
- Choose your Dice
  - d4
  - d6
  - d8
  - d10
  - d12
  - d20
  - d100
  - Help
  - Roll
  - Comment (Optional)
- Reply
- Quote

Eric Flood

United States
Sunnyvale
California

There's a favorite quote of Mr. Rebelo's, which I have also taken to heart:

"Stock value maybe value, dividend value always value."

i.e. yes, you're trashing your own stock value by $45/$69, but who cares in the grand scheme of things? Someone else is quite likely to do so at some point anyway, especially if they look ripe to take off. The larger question is: can you afford losing that company? If it's good, and other players have sufficient cash, can they take it? Will they? Do you care?

The new company had better be sufficiently valuable to do this.

However, the *absolute worst thing* for a player to do is buy 30,40,50% of a new company that will not be floated. I can see the occassional argument for reserving a 20% presidency, if you "know" what you're doing. Beyond that is bad playing bordering on idiocy. Count your cash, and take your position, before you pull the trigger. Then commit. Otherwise, you're better off buying more paying shares and aiming for 1st or 2nd in priority to start the company next SR.

Posted Thu Aug 18, 2011 11:49 pm
- Choose your Dice
  - d4
  - d6
  - d8
  - d10
  - d12
  - d20
  - d100
  - Help
  - Roll
  - Comment (Optional)
- Reply
- Quote

Breno K.

Brazil
Brasília
Distrito Federal

It's not Rebelo's, it's from Bruce Beard, I think.

Posted Thu Aug 18, 2011 11:53 pm
- Choose your Dice
  - d4
  - d6
  - d8
  - d10
  - d12
  - d20
  - d100
  - Help
  - Roll
  - Comment (Optional)
- Reply
- Quote

Eric Flood

United States
Sunnyvale
California

BrenoK wrote:

It's not Rebelo's, it's from Bruce Beard, I think.

I was uncertain as to the original source, but have heard it oft repeated from the source indicated, hence the indication that it is Rebelo's quote, not a quote from Rebelo

Posted Fri Aug 19, 2011 12:16 am
- Choose your Dice
  - d4
  - d6
  - d8
  - d10
  - d12
  - d20
  - d100
  - Help
  - Roll
  - Comment (Optional)
- Reply
- Quote

Jim Cote

United States

Maine

blueatheart wrote:

C'mon guys, you have simple maths abilities! If you don't have $360 ($402 is more often the "magic number"), you don't have a second company! Sell shares in your other companies if need be (potentially making offers for someone else to take a Presidency you might not want as much as the new company). One should *never* wind up in this position as a new player, although there are situations where reserving presidency is an excellent play (I'm not good enough to grok those intricacies fully, myself).

It wasn't a math problem. I just don't see why owning shares is a bad thing. Are you saying to buy 6 shares or buy none? I don't believe that's always true, but I also don't know why.

Posted Fri Aug 19, 2011 12:45 am
- Choose your Dice
  - d4
  - d6
  - d8
  - d10
  - d12
  - d20
  - d100
  - Help
  - Roll
  - Comment (Optional)
- Reply
- Quote

Eric Flood

United States
Sunnyvale
California

Are the shares paying? If not (because the company hasn't floated), then your money is just sitting there! Meanwhile, Ben has shares in his company that are paying the bank or the company instead of you. Congratulations, you are now losing.

The major detractor to starting a new company is that you have an OR of no income for your shares. If the benefits outweigh this problem, then it's still a good investment. If you are spending an extra set of ORs sitting on non-paying shares, that's a bad investment.

Owning paying shares is almost always a good thing, despite liabilities. Owning shares that look to be non-paying for a large amount of time is nearly always a bad thing (unless you control the company and are using the money to pump into somewhere else).

In the larger scheme of things, capital control is *huge*. If your non-paying shares are earning you capital control, good. Otherwise, bad. You want all that money in the company to be yours, via privates or assets. If your shares control no capital, you are losing.

Posted Fri Aug 19, 2011 1:18 am
- Choose your Dice
  - d4
  - d6
  - d8
  - d10
  - d12
  - d20
  - d100
  - Help
  - Roll
  - Comment (Optional)
- Reply
- Quote

Paul Clarke

(paulclarke339)

United Kingdom
Southampton
Hampshire

If the company doesn't float then you don't get dividends. It would have been better to buy other shares (which you can later sell and hurt the stock values of other companies, as a bonus).

Posted Fri Aug 19, 2011 1:19 am
- Choose your Dice
  - d4
  - d6
  - d8
  - d10
  - d12
  - d20
  - d100
  - Help
  - Roll
  - Comment (Optional)
- Reply
- Quote

Phil

United States
Falmouth
Maine

Skyrim = Amazing!!!

O.o

blueatheart wrote:

Are the shares paying? If not (because the company hasn't floated), then your money is just sitting there! Meanwhile, Ben has shares in his company that are paying the bank or the company instead of you. Congratulations, you are now losing.

The major detractor to starting a new company is that you have an OR of no income for your shares. If the benefits outweigh this problem, then it's still a good investment. If you are spending an extra set of ORs sitting on non-paying shares, that's a bad investment.

Owning paying shares is almost always a good thing, despite liabilities. Owning shares that look to be non-paying for a large amount of time is nearly always a bad thing (unless you control the company and are using the money to pump into somewhere else).

In the larger scheme of things, capital control is *huge*. If your non-paying shares are earning you capital control, good. Otherwise, bad. You want all that money in the company to be yours, via privates or assets. If your shares control no capital, you are losing.

I learned this lesson early on. It was good to see a failing strategy in practice. I knew I was behind right away. I can't wait to play my next 18xx.

Posted Fri Aug 19, 2011 1:32 am
- Choose your Dice
  - d4
  - d6
  - d8
  - d10
  - d12
  - d20
  - d100
  - Help
  - Roll
  - Comment (Optional)
- Reply
- Quote

Jim Cote

United States

Maine

blueatheart wrote:

Are the shares paying?

So there's never a case where you would buy a share that doesn't end up paying? I don't see how you can prevent it or control it. Some people are describing how complex the game is and how all the systems interact with each other, yet you make it sound like one could play by a simple flowchart.

Posted Fri Aug 19, 2011 2:48 am
- Choose your Dice
  - d4
  - d6
  - d8
  - d10
  - d12
  - d20
  - d100
  - Help
  - Roll
  - Comment (Optional)
- Reply
- Quote

Breno K.

Brazil
Brasília
Distrito Federal

ekted wrote:

blueatheart wrote:

Are the shares paying?

So there's never a case where you would buy a share that doesn't end up paying? I don't see how you can prevent it or control it. Some people are describing how complex the game is and how all the systems interact with each other, yet you make it sound like one could play by a simple flowchart.

There are many false options in 18xx, it is not an eurogame. 99% of the time, a player is better off buying paying shares (or shares that go into the creation of a company). As one learns the basic moves in a game, one is better off staying in the 95% cases.

Like with the paying out vs holding dividends. When one says "you have two choices", the image one transmits is NOT the actual case in which it means "95% of the time you should be picking option 1" (paying out, in this case). Our group took a while before not-holding dividends until cert limit was reached or when it was to buy a permanent train.

18xx is full of 95x5% option splits. Playing well is recognizing when you should be going against the stream.

Posted Fri Aug 19, 2011 3:06 am
- Choose your Dice
  - d4
  - d6
  - d8
  - d10
  - d12
  - d20
  - d100
  - Help
  - Roll
  - Comment (Optional)
- Reply
- Quote

J C Lawrence

United States
Campbell
California

ekted wrote:

blueatheart wrote:

Are the shares paying?

So there's never a case where you would buy a share that doesn't end up paying?

There are many such cases. Is the share yellow? Does it place another player under pressure in an attractive way? Does it offer a forking decision to another player that I can exploit? Is the opportunity cost of not buying the share now high? Does it affect the likely location of priority to my advantage? Am I trading one expensive shares for multiple cheap shares? Does it sell out a company I'm heavily invested in? Does it change another player's incentives toward actions which weaken his position? There are huge number of possible reasons.

Quote:

I don't see how you can prevent it or control it. Some people are describing how complex the game is and how all the systems interact with each other, yet you make it sound like one could play by a simple flowchart.

Some choices indeed appear simple and easy, and sometimes they even are. It isn't such sometimes that bite you; it is the exceptions (which aren't so rare as a set, but are rare as discrete types) that have the teeth.

Posted Fri Aug 19, 2011 9:02 am
- Choose your Dice
  - d4
  - d6
  - d8
  - d10
  - d12
  - d20
  - d100
  - Help
  - Roll
  - Comment (Optional)
- Reply
- Quote

Chester Ogborn

United States
Albuquerque
New Mexico

blueatheart wrote:

chally wrote:

There were a number of new player mistakes (including both Phil and Jim starting second companies at only $60/share when they couldn't affiord to float them

I was literally drinking coffee - and choked on it/spit it out when I read this. Thanks.

C'mon guys, you have simple maths abilities! If you don't have $360 ($402 is more often the "magic number"), you don't have a second company! Sell shares in your other companies if need be (potentially making offers for someone else to take a Presidency you might not want as much as the new company). One should *never* wind up in this position as a new player, although there are situations where reserving presidency is an excellent play (I'm not good enough to grok those intricacies fully, myself).

It is actually usually a better idea to start a second company much higher than $60 anyway.

That's a little harsh as a response to a new player. I think the most valuable lessons in 18xx are the ones learned from mistakes. Tying up your money in a dead company, waiting to be able to float it (or being unsuccessful colluding with another player to share the starting capital cost) is a painful mistake. But starting to have lights come on and realizing exactly why that was a bad move is part of discovering the game system.

People often get distracted at the beginning into trying to run companies well. They may be very successful at it, but have to withhold a couple times to finance a new engine, etc. This hurts their personal wealth in share value and in shares that are not paying to the PLAYER at those times. Its just another way that you have your money tied up in a venture that isn't increasing your personal wealth. And its a good way to get behind a player whose money is in shares that ARE paying out.

But I don't think its obvious to most players at the outset. Its part of discovering the game. The next step is to try and figure out how to juggle money/trains from company to company to keep all your shares productive (if that's your goal).

But far from being logically linear, there are many directions a player can go. Purposefully withhold in a company to put the shares in the yellow (or brown) so that they can hold more shares than anyone else in the endgame, or be able to buy up more than 60%, then enjoy having a diesel train paying them loads at the end of the game. Buy shares in other companies simply to have leverage on other players (selling their shares to ding down that player's value). Buy shares in other players' companies to prevent that company from being able to earn additional revenue from paying dividends on shares that it claims (not in players' hands). Just a couple considerations off the top of my head. Already mentioned was the notion of 'reserving' a presidency by buying it EVEN if you can't afford to float the company. When is that the right play? Great question. Tryto answer that and you're trying to understand a lot of the moving parts in this game system.

But comments like the one referenced above come across as condescending, which I doubt was the intent.

Posted Fri Aug 19, 2011 5:40 pm
- Choose your Dice
  - d4
  - d6
  - d8
  - d10
  - d12
  - d20
  - d100
  - Help
  - Roll
  - Comment (Optional)
- Reply
- Quote

Phil

United States
Falmouth
Maine

Skyrim = Amazing!!!

O.o

cornjob wrote:

But comments like the one referenced above come across as condescending, which I doubt was the intent.

Most of the responses to this Socratic method post have seemed condescending.

Posted Fri Aug 19, 2011 6:18 pm
- Choose your Dice
  - d4
  - d6
  - d8
  - d10
  - d12
  - d20
  - d100
  - Help
  - Roll
  - Comment (Optional)
- Reply
- Quote

J C Lawrence

United States
Campbell
California

The first rule is to make your money work well for you. The second rule it to make the other player's money not work well for them. Neither, alone, is enough. Sometimes the second rule is more important than the first rule; other times it isn't. The 18xx are war games played with stocks, trains and money.

Edited Fri Aug 19, 2011 8:59 pm
Posted Fri Aug 19, 2011 6:19 pm
- Choose your Dice
  - d4
  - d6
  - d8
  - d10
  - d12
  - d20
  - d100
  - Help
  - Roll
  - Comment (Optional)
- Reply
- Quote

Russ Williams

(russ)

Poland
Wrocław
Dolny Śląsk

Quarashi wrote:

cornjob wrote:

But comments like the one referenced above come across as condescending, which I doubt was the intent.

Most of the responses to this Socratic method post have seemed condescending.

Symmetrically, many of the Socratic method assertions about how the game is uninteresting and pointlessly chaotic and unfun and strategically simplistic seemed a bit condescending too.

Posted Fri Aug 19, 2011 7:01 pm
- Choose your Dice
  - d4
  - d6
  - d8
  - d10
  - d12
  - d20
  - d100
  - Help
  - Roll
  - Comment (Optional)
- Reply
- Quote

Eric Flood

United States
Sunnyvale
California

ekted wrote:

blueatheart wrote:

Are the shares paying?

So there's never a case where you would buy a share that doesn't end up paying? I don't see how you can prevent it or control it.

blueatheart wrote:

Owning shares that look to be non-paying for a large amount of time is nearly always a bad thing (unless you control the company and are using the money to pump into somewhere else).

Notice the time qualifier here. One or perhaps even two non-paying ORs look to be coming in the future? Those shares are probably still worth buying, if that money is going towards company assets you want to be a part of. Longer than that, or if the money isn't going into assets you want...not so much. A non-operating company is effectively a non-paying share with no capital with which to purchase assets you might want.

cornjob wrote:

That's a little harsh as a response to a new player. I think the most valuable lessons in 18xx are the ones learned from mistakes. Tying up your money in a dead company, waiting to be able to float it (or being unsuccessful colluding with another player to share the starting capital cost) is a painful mistake. But starting to have lights come on and realizing exactly why that was a bad move is part of discovering the game system.

It may be harsh, but it is also one of those fundamental mistakes that I would expect only of people new to gaming in general. If I were at the table with a gaming friend who didn't bother multiplying by 6 before making an action, I would similarly be disappointed and shocked and make decrying remarks.

Mis-managing your money and winding up with, say, $355, when you need $360 to float, is easy to do and is not a big deal. One should realize that fact as a nearly-trivial thought before making the next decision, however.

Posted Fri Aug 19, 2011 9:14 pm
- Choose your Dice
  - d4
  - d6
  - d8
  - d10
  - d12
  - d20
  - d100
  - Help
  - Roll
  - Comment (Optional)
- Reply
- Quote

Phil

United States
Falmouth
Maine

Skyrim = Amazing!!!

O.o

blueatheart wrote:

It may be harsh, but it is also one of those fundamental mistakes that I would expect only of people new to gaming in general. If I were at the table with a gaming friend who didn't bother multiplying by 6 before making an action, I would similarly be disappointed and shocked and make decrying remarks.

Mis-managing your money and winding up with, say, $355, when you need $360 to float, is easy to do and is not a big deal. One should realize that fact as a nearly-trivial thought before making the next decision, however.

I think you are slightly confused. We tried floating a company in two stock rounds instead of one, where we would buy into a company and then sell off our stocks to the market before the OR. I knew that I did not have enough cash on hand to float the company in one round, instead I tried floating it in two.

Edited Fri Aug 19, 2011 9:19 pm
Posted Fri Aug 19, 2011 9:19 pm
- Choose your Dice
  - d4
  - d6
  - d8
  - d10
  - d12
  - d20
  - d100
  - Help
  - Roll
  - Comment (Optional)
- Reply
- Quote

Eric Flood

United States
Sunnyvale
California

Quarashi wrote:

blueatheart wrote:

It may be harsh, but it is also one of those fundamental mistakes that I would expect only of people new to gaming in general. If I were at the table with a gaming friend who didn't bother multiplying by 6 before making an action, I would similarly be disappointed and shocked and make decrying remarks.

Mis-managing your money and winding up with, say, $355, when you need $360 to float, is easy to do and is not a big deal. One should realize that fact as a nearly-trivial thought before making the next decision, however.

I think you are slightly confused. We tried floating a company in two stock rounds instead of one, where we would buy into a company and then sell off our stocks to the market before the OR. I knew that I did not have enough cash on hand to float the company in one round, instead I tried floating it in two.

Did you have >20% of a company that had not yet floated, during an OR? If yes, you made a mistake.

I forget if 18AL allows this, but another valid approach is to buy 60%, sell a share or two, then use the extra capital to float the second company (you could even sell a share or two and invest in another company instead if you believe it's worth your while). This depends upon the game's ability to allow the selling of shares prior to operation (which I believe AL allows).

Posted Fri Aug 19, 2011 9:28 pm
- Choose your Dice
  - d4
  - d6
  - d8
  - d10
  - d12
  - d20
  - d100
  - Help
  - Roll
  - Comment (Optional)
- Reply
- Quote

peter mumford

United States
Somerville
Massachusetts

ceci n'est pas une pipe

I played quite a lot of 18AL before I felt any need to move on to more challenging stuff. For slowpokes and the calculation-challenged it has plenty to work through, and it has all the basic 18XX themes going on. If you lost, and are not sure why, then you don't really *need* a more complex game.

18GA is a modest step up from 18AL, and 1830 is a very significant step up. 1830 is a big game, and it's not your friend.

Posted Sat Aug 20, 2011 4:11 pm
- Choose your Dice
  - d4
  - d6
  - d8
  - d10
  - d12
  - d20
  - d100
  - Help
  - Roll
  - Comment (Optional)
- Reply
- Quote

Philip Johnson

United States
Camillus
New York

blueatheart wrote:

This depends upon the game's ability to allow the selling of shares prior to operation (which I believe AL allows).

It does allow this, as long as it isn't during the first SR (no shares can be sold during the first SR).

Quarashi wrote:

blueatheart wrote:

It may be harsh, but it is also one of those fundamental mistakes that I would expect only of people new to gaming in general. If I were at the table with a gaming friend who didn't bother multiplying by 6 before making an action, I would similarly be disappointed and shocked and make decrying remarks.

Mis-managing your money and winding up with, say, $355, when you need $360 to float, is easy to do and is not a big deal. One should realize that fact as a nearly-trivial thought before making the next decision, however.

I think you are slightly confused. We tried floating a company in two stock rounds instead of one, where we would buy into a company and then sell off our stocks to the market before the OR. I knew that I did not have enough cash on hand to float the company in one round, instead I tried floating it in two.

This is potentially a huge mistake, if your intent was to float that company specifically (also assuming I understand what you're saying). If you were short on cash to float a new company, but chose to buy shares up to what you could afford, then sell those shares down to the president's certificate, you put yourself in a situation where any one player could have bought three shares of that company (at a now reduced price), thus floating it and taking control of it, and you would have been helpless to defend against it (ie maintain control of the company) because you had already sold shares of that company in that SR and could not buy them back.

If you and Jim were both planning to do this, you probably should have both ended up with the company the other was planning on floating, which would have been operational, but with a reduced share price. If you both thought you were trailing the third player, this may have even been your best move (colluding to buy the shares, sell them down, and float the companies via the aforementioned method) if controlling that extra capital would have helped you rein in the lead the third player had by rusting his trains, being able to buy more of an important train, etc.

Edited Mon Aug 22, 2011 6:07 pm
Posted Mon Aug 22, 2011 5:57 pm
- Choose your Dice
  - d4
  - d6
  - d8
  - d10
  - d12
  - d20
  - d100
  - Help
  - Roll
  - Comment (Optional)
- Reply
- Quote

Jim Cote

United States

Maine

But at some point in the game, players might buy shares of a floated company that are above par. Doesn't that make you wish that you had gotten them when they were cheaper? I understand the idea that it's better to own stock that's paying dividends, but if you can't even do that, then why not buy something for the future?

Posted Mon Aug 22, 2011 11:05 pm
- Choose your Dice
  - d4
  - d6
  - d8
  - d10
  - d12
  - d20
  - d100
  - Help
  - Roll
  - Comment (Optional)
- Reply
- Quote

J C Lawrence

United States
Campbell
California

ekted wrote:

...but if you can't even do that, then why not buy something for the future?

Who is helped more?

Posted Mon Aug 22, 2011 11:25 pm
- Choose your Dice
  - d4
  - d6
  - d8
  - d10
  - d12
  - d20
  - d100
  - Help
  - Roll
  - Comment (Optional)
- Reply
- Quote

Jim Cote

United States

Maine

clearclaw wrote:

ekted wrote:

...but if you can't even do that, then why not buy something for the future?

Who is helped more?

Do you mean that I am helping another player float the company? If so, then yes, I understand that. But how often does only one player buy shares in a given company? I can buy shares before it's floated or after. If they are likely to be cheaper before, couldn't that offset the "help"? Again, I am not disagreeing with anyone. I am learning by asking questions.

Posted Mon Aug 22, 2011 11:34 pm
- Choose your Dice
  - d4
  - d6
  - d8
  - d10
  - d12
  - d20
  - d100
  - Help
  - Roll
  - Comment (Optional)
- Reply
- Quote

J C Lawrence

United States
Campbell
California

ekted wrote:

But how often does only one player buy shares in a given company?

Almost always in the SR in which the company floats (exception: buying in order to then immediately sell).

Quote:

I can buy shares before it's floated or after. If they are likely to be cheaper before, couldn't that offset the "help"?

Buying shares from the Open Market does not help float the company. Instead it puts the current president under pressure to defend his company least another player take it over on the cheap via cheap pool shares.

Edited Mon Aug 22, 2011 11:46 pm
Posted Mon Aug 22, 2011 11:38 pm
- Choose your Dice
  - d4
  - d6
  - d8
  - d10
  - d12
  - d20
  - d100
  - Help
  - Roll
  - Comment (Optional)
- Reply
- Quote

Chester Ogborn

United States
Albuquerque
New Mexico

ekted wrote:

clearclaw wrote:

ekted wrote:

...but if you can't even do that, then why not buy something for the future?

Who is helped more?

Do you mean that I am helping another player float the company? If so, then yes, I understand that. But how often does only one player buy shares in a given company? I can buy shares before it's floated or after. If they are likely to be cheaper before, couldn't that offset the "help"? Again, I am not disagreeing with anyone. I am learning by asking questions.

If you make $8 but your opponent makes $10, then its better if you both make $0.

Buying the shares that allow the company to float usually means you're taking some of that pressure off the player who is president. More start up capital, ability to purchase train(s) and placing yourself in a position of liability (getting the company dumped on you when the other player decides to sell off) are all considerations.

Its not a knee-jerk answer either way (to buy or not buy the shares), but it sounds from the incomplete description like players in your game were taking actions that benefited their opponents by purchasing start-up shares in a company where another player had presidency.

I still don't really understand what you're saying occurred with players buying shares in successive stock rounds before the company floated.

I don't see a problem with making "mistakes" like this as you're learning the system. It sounds like all the players in the game are a similar experience level. I guess my point would be that its possible to play much more efficiently, and that you're missing opportunities. The ability to do better financially consists of decisions that won't be immediately obvious to a beginner. I see no problem with enjoying the exploration and having multiple "aha" moments as you start to see opportunities that you don't see yet. I do see a problem with dismissing the game system and never seeing these options.

I think it would be most helpful to you to see a sample game (or part of one) played by experienced players where they explain their decisions.

Anyone know of a game report like this for 18AL? (More likely for 1830.) I think you'll be surprised at the things players are taking into account when they decide what company to start, par value, etc. I know I'd enjoy seeing a narrative like this from JC.

Posted Mon Aug 22, 2011 11:44 pm
- Choose your Dice
  - d4
  - d6
  - d8
  - d10
  - d12
  - d20
  - d100
  - Help
  - Roll
  - Comment (Optional)
- Reply
- Quote

Breno K.

Brazil
Brasília
Distrito Federal

ekted wrote:

But at some point in the game, players might buy shares of a floated company that are above par. Doesn't that make you wish that you had gotten them when they were cheaper? I understand the idea that it's better to own stock that's paying dividends, but if you can't even do that, then why not buy something for the future?

Not necessarily.

Say you could buy a share of company X for 70 or for 90
During this period, the share paid out (aside from a 20 in share value increase) 32 bucks in dividends

Instead of buying it for 70, you bought company Y for 65, which is now at 75

But it paid 45 in dividends in that mean time. And you also had 5 bucks left over for some other investment.

also, it kept company Y from receiving dividends, as the share you bought came from the bank pool, and it might be interesting to have company Y with less capital...

and so on.

It's all an intricate gear in which you have to constantly decide what is relevant and what is not. In most cases, having company Y receive 45 bucks less in those rounds will be irrelevant. In other cases, it will be game-shaping.

Posted Tue Aug 23, 2011 1:47 am
- Choose your Dice
  - d4
  - d6
  - d8
  - d10
  - d12
  - d20
  - d100
  - Help
  - Roll
  - Comment (Optional)
- Reply
- Quote

Breno K.

Brazil
Brasília
Distrito Federal

cornjob wrote:

ekted wrote:

clearclaw wrote:

ekted wrote:

...but if you can't even do that, then why not buy something for the future?

Who is helped more?

Do you mean that I am helping another player float the company? If so, then yes, I understand that. But how often does only one player buy shares in a given company? I can buy shares before it's floated or after. If they are likely to be cheaper before, couldn't that offset the "help"? Again, I am not disagreeing with anyone. I am learning by asking questions.

If you make $8 but your opponent makes $10, then its better if you both make $0.

Depends, if you're in second place and your opponent is in 5th, it's probably worth it.

Posted Tue Aug 23, 2011 1:48 am
- Choose your Dice
  - d4
  - d6
  - d8
  - d10
  - d12
  - d20
  - d100
  - Help
  - Roll
  - Comment (Optional)
- Reply
- Quote

Ben

(chally)

United States
Washington
Dist of Columbia

cornjob wrote:

I still don't really understand what you're saying occurred with players buying shares in successive stock rounds before the company floated.

Just to be clear, all that I wa s talking about was that a player, say Phil, would buy the first 3 shares of some company, ABC, before it floated. Phil did not have money to buy more shares, and no other player had shares in ABC. On the next stock round, Phil could afford to buy the remaining 3 shares needed to float the company.

It's clear that this kind of behavior is sub-optimal because his money is earning no dividends for two ORs. Effectively, this is an opportunity cost argument. But I'm curious if it is detrimental in other respects. What, if anything, could Phil's opponents do to really punish him for tying up his money in an unfloated company?

Posted Tue Aug 23, 2011 5:05 am
- Choose your Dice
  - d4
  - d6
  - d8
  - d10
  - d12
  - d20
  - d100
  - Help
  - Roll
  - Comment (Optional)
- Reply
- Quote

Chester Ogborn

United States
Albuquerque
New Mexico

chally wrote:

cornjob wrote:

I still don't really understand what you're saying occurred with players buying shares in successive stock rounds before the company floated.

Just to be clear, all that I wa s talking about was that a player, say Phil, would buy the first 3 shares of some company, ABC, before it floated. Phil did not have money to buy more shares, and no other player had shares in ABC. On the next stock round, Phil could afford to buy the remaining 3 shares needed to float the company.

It's clear that this kind of behavior is sub-optimal because his money is earning no dividends for two ORs. Effectively, this is an opportunity cost argument. But I'm curious if it is detrimental in other respects. What, if anything, could Phil's opponents do to really punish him for tying up his money in an unfloated company?

Perhaps someone had enough money to buy 4 shares...so they buy the company out from under him. Different 18xx games give the starting capital to the company in different ways. 1830 (and I think 18AL) require 6 shares sold for 100% capitalization. So if player B could only afford 4 shares, but was able to start a company with that investment and steal the presidency away from Phil, its probably to Phil's detriment.

Being the president allows Player B to use those funds to finance selling his private(s) for maximum, maybe juggling funds or trains to a 2nd company he owns, and then maybe sell before Phil can...giving Phil the husk of the company back.

Of course, Phil could just sell his shares when the presidency goes elsewhere, hurting the share value, but it still leaves Player B with a company to operate that he couldn't have otherwise afforded to start yet.

Maybe the company is so obviously the best company, greatest opportunities for big pay-outs, has synergistic track lays with another company he owns, etc. There could be reasons to "reserve" the presidency by buying it before it could be floated.

But more likely, Phil could have bought shares in another company currently operating, then sold them all the next round and had sufficient funds to fully float (buy 6 shares) in a RR.

The other problem that could occur is if Phil isn't able to raise enough to finish floating the company in the next round either. Or maybe that initial start location gets trashed by dead-end tracks that other players lay...since Phil is committed to that company but can't do anything to influence that track until it floats.

Posted Tue Aug 23, 2011 5:16 am
- Choose your Dice
  - d4
  - d6
  - d8
  - d10
  - d12
  - d20
  - d100
  - Help
  - Roll
  - Comment (Optional)
- Reply
- Quote

Philip Johnson

United States
Camillus
New York

cornjob wrote:

I think it would be most helpful to you to see a sample game (or part of one) played by experienced players where they explain their decisions.

This a thousand times over. My first experience with 18xx was a 12+ hour partial game of 18C2C where JC sat to my right and generally explained every move he was making and why. I had no misconception that I was playing competitively, but it was immensely helpful to have the sort of running commentary he provided for his game, along with pointing out mistakes I was making along the way.

Posted Sat Sep 3, 2011 8:56 pm
- Choose your Dice
  - d4
  - d6
  - d8
  - d10
  - d12
  - d20
  - d100
  - Help
  - Roll
  - Comment (Optional)
- Reply
- Quote

Jim Cote

United States

Maine

I have now played 2 games of 18AL, and 2 games of 1856, the first of which was aborted because of a misplayed rule.

My question now is: In games with all experienced players, how often do players actually get stuck having to buy trains using their own cash? Do you always see it coming and prevent it? If you do see it coming, are there times when you could prevent it, but choose not to because you gain more than you lose?

I find myself, as president, always looking for ways to dump my companies, and as a minority shareholder, always worried about holding too many shares. Because of this, and the fact that high priced stock gets reduced when players buy at par and sell at market, companies spend most of their time below par. I think next time I want to just make a valuable company, keep it, and use it to mess with other companies on the board.

Posted Sat Sep 3, 2011 9:28 pm
- Choose your Dice
  - d4
  - d6
  - d8
  - d10
  - d12
  - d20
  - d100
  - Help
  - Roll
  - Comment (Optional)
- Reply
- Quote

Philip Johnson

United States
Camillus
New York

ekted wrote:

I have now played 2 games of 18AL, and 2 games of 1856, the first of which was aborted because of a misplayed rule.

My question now is: In games with all experienced players, how often do players actually get stuck having to buy trains using their own cash? Do you always see it coming and prevent it? If you do see it coming, are there times when you could prevent it, but choose not to because you gain more than you lose?

In games with experienced players, it isn't uncommon for a player to find himself in a position where he has to contribute at least some funds to buy a train. Many times, you can see it coming (i.e. one or more new companies floated that you know will buy trains and thus rust your trains). As an experienced player, you should always be looking for ways to force your competitors to unexpectedly have to buy trains with their personal funds, although it is difficult to do (many times this comes down to withholding funds with a company, giving it JUST enough cash to buy that next train, and causing everyone else at the table much grief). Yes, sometimes you can see a phase change coming that you could act to prevent or to prevent the contribution of personal funds, but choose not to. The answer to this question is a difficult and often game determining one.

ekted wrote:

I find myself, as president, always looking for ways to dump my companies, and as a minority shareholder, always worried about holding too many shares. Because of this, and the fact that high priced stock gets reduced when players buy at par and sell at market, companies spend most of their time below par. I think next time I want to just make a valuable company, keep it, and use it to mess with other companies on the board.

Your concerns, both about dumping companies and having them dumped on you are not unfounded, but are perhaps are too severe. As I stated above, with experienced players, the rusting of trains is often (but not always) predictable. In cases where it is likely that such an event is going to happen, most players will play more conservatively. However, dumping companies isn't something to be taken lightly. Yes, you are freeing yourself of the liabilities that come with being president, but you are also giving up the control of (usually) valuable assets. There are cases where that's a good thing, but dumping a company at the wrong time can be disastrous.

Without examples it's difficult to speak in more specific terms than this, but the questions you're asking and the thought process you're going through says to me that you're starting to "see behind the curtain" so to speak.

Edited Sat Sep 3, 2011 10:21 pm
Posted Sat Sep 3, 2011 10:17 pm
- Choose your Dice
  - d4
  - d6
  - d8
  - d10
  - d12
  - d20
  - d100
  - Help
  - Roll
  - Comment (Optional)
- Reply
- Quote

Breno K.

Brazil
Brasília
Distrito Federal

Yeah, the first inclination is to always go for the company dump. After a while, you see that it is not always good to dump the companies: you might be sinking yourself along with the dumped-upon.

Posted Sat Sep 3, 2011 10:32 pm
- Choose your Dice
  - d4
  - d6
  - d8
  - d10
  - d12
  - d20
  - d100
  - Help
  - Roll
  - Comment (Optional)
- Reply
- Quote

J C Lawrence

United States
Campbell
California

ekted wrote:

In games with all experienced players, how often do players actually get stuck having to buy trains using their own cash?

It is common. I usually plan on doing so from the start of the game. In yesterday's game of 18C2C ! bought over $8,000 of trains from my pocket in the last four ORs of the game (and won in no small part due to this).

Quote:

Do you always see it coming and prevent it?

No, I see it as a desirable characteristic in most cases. As always, the question is not IF? but WHEN? As long as the timing is good I'll buy trains out of pocket all day long.

Quote:

If you do see it coming, are there times when you could prevent it, but choose not to because you gain more than you lose?

Yes, that's the usual case.

Quote:

...companies spend most of their time below par...

The early game companies should spend most of the game well above par.

Quote:

I think next time I want to just make a valuable company, keep it, and use it to mess with other companies on the board.

That can certainly work.

Edited Mon Sep 5, 2011 3:35 am
Posted Mon Sep 5, 2011 3:03 am
- Choose your Dice
  - d4
  - d6
  - d8
  - d10
  - d12
  - d20
  - d100
  - Help
  - Roll
  - Comment (Optional)
- Reply
- Quote

Philip Johnson

United States
Camillus
New York

Quote:

If you do see it coming, are there times when you could prevent it, but choose not to because you gain more than you lose?

[q]Yes, that's the usual case.

I think this is THE defining characteristic between 18xx "newbies" and experienced players- the experienced player has already seen this exact decision coming, evaluated the possibilities, and reacted to it before it happens.

Edited Mon Sep 5, 2011 7:24 pm
Posted Mon Sep 5, 2011 7:24 pm
- Choose your Dice
  - d4
  - d6
  - d8
  - d10
  - d12
  - d20
  - d100
  - Help
  - Roll
  - Comment (Optional)
- Reply
- Quote

J C Lawrence

United States
Campbell
California

IcemanCU wrote:

Quote:

If you do see it coming, are there times when you could prevent it, but choose not to because you gain more than you lose?

[q]Yes, that's the usual case.

I think this is THE defining characteristic between 18xx å"newbies" and experienced players- the experienced player has already seen this exact decision coming, evaluated the possibilities, and reacted to it before it happens.

Oh look, you can dump your company on me! Hmm, yes please! Please please please dump your company on me! I'll take ever such good care of it!

If I hadn't wanted that company dumped on me, I either wouldn't have taken the risk or would have ensured that it wasn't to your interest.

Novice players frequently don't understand the games being played inside the game. More often than not they don't recognise that a game is even being played.

On Thursday we played a practice round of the 18C2C private auction along with the players commenting on why they made various decisions and what they were attempting in the process. Two of the more experienced players specifically talked about how they were attempting to ensure that priority ended up in an advantageous position given the privates they'd win, and how they'd been doing so starting from their first bid in the auction. The other players had not believed that attempting to control priority location was realistically possible in an 1830-style private auction, let alone it being even remotely predictable, but as the auction continued the light slowly dawned. When the auction finally resolved priority was exactly where I'd said I was pushing it (and where the other experienced player also liked it). In Saturday's game of 18C2C with the same players the dance for control of priority in the auction was a little different with the experienced players taking significantly different approaches than they had in Thursday's trial, but priority indeed again ended up where desired. This time, having seen it maneuvered and danced twice, the other players nodded their heads wisely and said, Ahh ha, yes, indeed we saw that happening this time...but yet how to partake int hat game ourselves.

This evening we played most of a game of 1830. During the private auction there indeed was a fight to control where priority eventuated...and I got it. In the resulting early game there was considerable mucking about around the early trains with highly selective stock slams and train not-buying and then buying in order to ensure that the C&A player (who had floated the PRR) was not able to fully exploit or realise their positional advantage (eg their shares were at $50 with 3 in the pool by the time they came to sell down). Later on, with that player's position in deep trouble, I engineered letting them buy two 5Ts while I bought 4T/5T/6T. If I'd been just a smidge smarter (and far less tired after 25 hours of playing 18C2C) the 6T would have come out early enough to nearly cause a bankruptcy along with handing me a nice company along with a permanent train and beautiful tokens. (I missed by $17 through stupid miscounting). The subject player never saw it coming and never saw the maneuvering that put them into the cross-hairs.

Later that player trashed the stock of my secondary company (nearly) into the yellow and was surprised when I said thank you. Sure, I'd just lost ~$100 in stock value...but now I only needed to plough once to get into the yellow, thus giving me 5 more slots to fill with nice shares of companies with permanent trains. And...that same player was shocked that I'd allow someone with the worst revenues and companies in the game to get two 5Ts while I got 4T/5T/6T and ran for $50+/share and was the first to hit paper limit.

This is not to say that I'm so terribly smart or that the other players are pathetic. I'm not and they're certainly not. However there are games within games within games in the 18XX and it can take a fair bit before players realiee that the inner games even exist, let alone have some idea of how to engage in them.

Edited Tue Sep 6, 2011 9:56 am
Posted Tue Sep 6, 2011 9:53 am
- Choose your Dice
  - d4
  - d6
  - d8
  - d10
  - d12
  - d20
  - d100
  - Help
  - Roll
  - Comment (Optional)
- Reply
- Quote

Eugene
Oregon

clearclaw wrote:

On Thursday we played a practice round of the 18C2C private auction along with the players commenting on why they made various decisions and what they were attempting in the process.

I would dearly relish being an audience to a full game with such player commentary. Perhaps then the essence of 18xx -- and any possible appeal it might hold -- will make itself known.

Posted Tue Sep 6, 2011 6:24 pm
- Choose your Dice
  - d4
  - d6
  - d8
  - d10
  - d12
  - d20
  - d100
  - Help
  - Roll
  - Comment (Optional)
- Reply
- Quote

peter mumford

United States
Somerville
Massachusetts

ceci n'est pas une pipe

ekted wrote:

I find myself, as president, always looking for ways to dump my companies, and as a minority shareholder, always worried about holding too many shares. Because of this, and the fact that high priced stock gets reduced when players buy at par and sell at market, companies spend most of their time below par. I think next time I want to just make a valuable company, keep it, and use it to mess with other companies on the board.

another idea is to 'dump a company on yourself'. This involves selling all but the president's share to the open market (do this in games where shares in the market pay dividends to the corp). You have to make them not quite attractive enough for your friends and enemies to buy. Your corp will start re-capitalizing itself. This plan can also work with a yellow-dog strategy.

Edited Tue Sep 6, 2011 7:19 pm
Posted Tue Sep 6, 2011 7:17 pm
- Choose your Dice
  - d4
  - d6
  - d8
  - d10
  - d12
  - d20
  - d100
  - Help
  - Roll
  - Comment (Optional)
- Reply
- Quote

J C Lawrence

United States
Campbell
California

garygarison wrote:

clearclaw wrote:

On Thursday we played a practice round of the 18C2C private auction along with the players commenting on why they made various decisions and what they were attempting in the process.

I would dearly relish being an audience to a full game with such player commentary. Perhaps then the essence of 18xx -- and any possible appeal it might hold -- will make itself known.

I'm increasingly finding that my comprehension is implicit rather than discrete. In the above discussion during the private auction I started one of my statements with, Well, either Scott or Aliza is going to have priority... and then realised that I simply knew that and had been making decisions based on that assumption but had no cogent idea why it was true. It took a challenge from another player and a bit of thinking to realise it was in fact true and that I could support it from first principles. Similar happened with more than a few track builds.

Why did I do that particular track build and not this other one? Why am I building for long-term route development here, and for short-term profit or seeming irrelevancy there?

Because it exerted a force in that direction on the game progression, and that was good for me.

How and why did it exert such a force, and why was that an advantage to me?

Uhh, (thinks furiously) because of yada yada and so-and-so given that PlayerX has setup for XXX and PlayerYYY for YYY, oh, and uhh, because priority was there and I held these and not those shares, and I could afford to spend the tempi in order to make it easier for PlayerZZZ to make a ZZZ mistake.

Did you know that before just now?

No, not at all. Well, yes actually, but I figured out what I already knew just now.

Edited Tue Sep 6, 2011 7:53 pm
Posted Tue Sep 6, 2011 7:51 pm
- Choose your Dice
  - d4
  - d6
  - d8
  - d10
  - d12
  - d20
  - d100
  - Help
  - Roll
  - Comment (Optional)
- Reply
- Quote

peter mumford

United States
Somerville
Massachusetts

ceci n'est pas une pipe

That's a fine brain dump! May I add that the reason for such implicit understanding of the game state must be pattern recognition?

You didn't follow a logical chain to get to the knowledge, rather you perceived a pattern formation and it presented its implications all of a piece.

Edited Tue Sep 6, 2011 11:30 pm
Posted Tue Sep 6, 2011 11:29 pm
- Choose your Dice
  - d4
  - d6
  - d8
  - d10
  - d12
  - d20
  - d100
  - Help
  - Roll
  - Comment (Optional)
- Reply
- Quote

J C Lawrence

United States
Campbell
California

photocurio wrote:

That's a fine brain dump! May I add that the reason for such implicit understanding of the game state must be pattern recognition?

I'm unconvinced. My internal models translate fairly well to something like a hydrodynamic pressure model. Players are subject to forces, are attempting to exert forces, have a given momentum and an acceleration toward another balance of forces and accelerations etc. These things, the discrete elements, are visible with a cursory glance at a few high-points, and in general they don't need a detailed examination or itemisation in order to draw accurate conclusions. Much like predicting where the rugby ball will squirt out of a scrum, it is readily predictable given only a few high level derivatives.

Where the cleverness (ha!) comes in I think is in the validation of the high level derivatives. Each observation also needs a validator, its check that yeah, this conclusion is safe and doesn't need a deep-dive into the details, and that observation is fishy and does need such a more detailed examination.

Quote:

You didn't follow a logical chain to get to the knowledge, rather you perceived a pattern formation and it presented its implications all of a piece.

The process seems closer to that of a classic analog computer.

Posted Tue Sep 6, 2011 11:49 pm
- Choose your Dice
  - d4
  - d6
  - d8
  - d10
  - d12
  - d20
  - d100
  - Help
  - Roll
  - Comment (Optional)
- Reply
- Quote

Eugene
Oregon

clearclaw wrote:

Much like predicting where the rugby ball will squirt out of a scrum, it is readily predictable given only a few high level derivatives.

I'll pull out this analogy the next time someone in a multi-player game insists that with enough analysis, the One Sure Optimal Move can be ascertained.

Posted Tue Sep 6, 2011 11:54 pm
- Choose your Dice
  - d4
  - d6
  - d8
  - d10
  - d12
  - d20
  - d100
  - Help
  - Roll
  - Comment (Optional)
- Reply
- Quote

J C Lawrence

United States
Campbell
California

Yeah, I've played more than enough rugby to know the limits there (mostly league despite living and schooling mostly in the more union-based south).

Edited Wed Sep 7, 2011 12:14 am
Posted Wed Sep 7, 2011 12:13 am
- Choose your Dice
  - d4
  - d6
  - d8
  - d10
  - d12
  - d20
  - d100
  - Help
  - Roll
  - Comment (Optional)
- Reply
- Quote

peter mumford

United States
Somerville
Massachusetts

ceci n'est pas une pipe

The hydraulic-pressure metaphor is a nice one.. on the other hand, I can't believe there aren't patterns and subtleties in a rugby 'scrum'. Not that I would know. Supposedly even American football is a game of precision and tactics.

Edited Wed Sep 7, 2011 6:59 am
Posted Wed Sep 7, 2011 6:58 am
- Choose your Dice
  - d4
  - d6
  - d8
  - d10
  - d12
  - d20
  - d100
  - Help
  - Roll
  - Comment (Optional)
- Reply
- Quote

Will Mellor

(ill6)

United Kingdom
London
ENGLAND

Quote:

"Multi-player solitaire" might be the craziest thing I've ever heard levied against 18xx!

Agree 110%

Edited Wed Nov 9, 2011 2:09 pm
Posted Wed Nov 9, 2011 2:09 pm
- Choose your Dice
  - d4
  - d6
  - d8
  - d10
  - d12
  - d20
  - d100
  - Help
  - Roll
  - Comment (Optional)
- Reply
- Quote

peter mumford